Why a series?

[biodroid]

I know this has probably been done before but I understand that some authors keep writing in the same world like Erikson or GRRM etc and their whole writing career (except for a few books here and there) is based on one world. Is it really necessary to keep writing in that world for personal reasons or financial gain even though the fans get tired of that world and its characters etc? I feel that sometimes a trilogy would suffice rather than a 10 book long series. I don't know about you guys but I want to see what else the author can push out. Its as though the author has created this world and is now bound to its rules when you actually want them to create a new world where different things happen (if you know what I mean). Take Pratchett for example I think he has written most of his works in the Discworld world and only a small handful is not, wouldn't any of you like to see what else he can do besides discworld? Or Goodkind, maybe he would write better if he left the world he was in and wrote something else. I don't know, just my thoughts on the situation.

[DeepThought]

Martin has being in the business for a long time and he as put out a myriad of different standalone books, short stories etc etc. Have a look at his Bibliography in his sub-forum.

Erikson is pretty new to the game and he is pumping out books in the Malazan series pretty fast (A novel per year) considering the quality of the novels, this is astonishing. Its near to a close. I think we'll see great many things other than his current EPIC fantasy.

Agreed on Pratchett, but have to admit his books are very, very good.

Cheers, DeepThought

[andrew.v.spencer]

As I understand it publishers like series. They often like to be sure an author has more than one shot in them. Most authors are just working folk like everyone else, they need the income, if they can do ten books in a series, it means ten years of income. Deviating might mean poverty and losing a book deal. This is the usual war between commerce and art. There are also those authors who love their worlds/characters and want to get it all down.

I agree that on ocassion one would like to see what a favourite author can do elsewhere, but I can see how that is not always possible, desired or is deemed too risky.

[chrispenycate]

There are three quite different problems (at least) addressed here; the multi-volume work, conceived as such, where the author must plough ahead to avoid the ire of fans, the additions of sequels to essentially finished works, frequently due to fan pressure, and the placing of unrelated stories in an already existing framework.

If we consider Marion Zimmer Bradley's "Darkover" series, there are a couple of multi-volume sequences, ideas too big to fit into one book. There are several continuing themes – the renunciate one in particular – which return with no particular continuity, and have some examples which are indisputably sequels, some written by fans rather than the original author. And there are some stories which are set on the planet because it was a convenient environment, and saved writing the descriptions all over again.

Much the same can be said of Anne McCaffrey's "Pern" or Mercedes Lackey's "Valdemar".

But note that each of the three was turning out other series, unrelated material, at the same time.

Pratchett's "Discworld" is very much a third case; although he is obliged to write humouristically, he's otherwise free to set any idea that might appeal to him in that framework, with no requirement for consistency, or continuity. You invent firearms, but later don't think they fit the atmosphere? Just ignore them in later books, nobody'll notice. Not like Niven's "Known space" where every gadget has to be checked as to why it can't solve the problem in a later volume.

[pyan]

Robert A. Heinlein stated the reasons he wrote in Grumbles from the Grave, and was totally unequivocal about it:

I write for the following reasons -

1. To support myself and my family;
2. To entertain my readers;
3. And, if possible, to cause my readers to think.
   
   GftG, Orbit 1991 ed, p.290

If the author is successful with a series, with a huge fanbase, and people hanging on every word about the next sequel, surely it must be counterproductive for him/her to invest up to two years of work in a departure from his/her successful work.
I would have thought it must be regarded as a luxury to be able to do so, and only achievable by the very top-selling authors.

[BookStop]

Sounds reasonable that authors continue series for monetary gain, and I'm sure when they start out a steady income is just what they need. However, that being said, I think it's a terrible thing when money once again wins the most-important-reason-for-doing-things race.

I'm sure publishers, being in the business of making greenbacks (I guess other colors for other countries), push the authors to stifle thier creativity and just continue with known formulas for success. And authors, having struggled with thier artistic expression for so long, can't always take a breakaway chance and do thier own thing again.

It's sad, but realitically, commerce is what runs the world as we know it, and unless you are a genius well of creativity and everyone bows to you, or a mega star already who can tell the man where he can go, chances are you too would stick with what you know.

[K. Riehl]

I know that Lois Bujold gets questions from her publishers like,"Can we get a new book from you, you know, new but just like the Miles Vorkosigan books.?" She now works out a deal with them 2 books of her choice then one Vorkosigan.
I understand the publishers want a sure sale but running a series into the ground is not a benefit for anyone.
Other authors have tried to catch on with titles outside the popular or famous series and just don't get the audience response and end up going back more than they should. Donaldson, Card, and... er... Anthony. How many Xanth books are there?

[Montero]

In the publishing forum there have been questions about authors crossing between SF and fantasy, writing in both. The main answer was in summary, "it is pushing it to get out a good quality book once a year so publishers want someone who will deliver something saleable on time" get out as in written, edited etc. Hence publishers like you to stick to one genre. I would guess that applies to interrupting established series.
That said folks did notice some writers who were capable of putting out more than one book a year.

This thread has already covered all the different flavours of series and writers possible motivations and covered anything I'd say on that.

In terms of authors who want to air other projects but also want to keep series going, as a reader I'm noticing other options. "Mid-sized" press like Solaris here in the UK - I could be reading it wrong but I'm getting the impression that some of their works are from authors whose main publisher isn't interested in a certain book they've been offered but it is still of publishable quality and interest to the readers.
There is also self-publishing of unwanted by main publisher books. Diane Duane on her website has an ongoing project for a third book about the cat mages that she will be publishing through Lulu, that her main publisher didn't want as the sales on the first two were not good enough.

I'm really hoping as a reader that there is going to be more and more of this sort of thing. Shame that Meisha Merlin folded - I liked a lot of what they were putting out and hadn't finished buying what I fancied from them.

[Fried Egg]

I must admit that a long, seemingly never ending series just puts me off big time.

I like books that can stand by themselves (even if they are part of a series). If not, as far as I am concerned, it is just a cynical ploy done for commercial reasons as far as I am concerned.

I was put off reading the rest of Martin's "Songs of Ice and Fire" series after reading (and enjoying) "Game of Thrones" because it was only then that I realised that it's just the first volume of a long series with no end in sight.

I guess what really killed long series for me was Robert Jordan's "Wheel of Time" which I gave up after book 8 when I realised that it had degenerated into nothing more than a money spinner.

I guess Pratchet's novels do each stand on their own but I can't help but feeling that he's a little too comfortable in his zone churning out novels as if they're on a production line. That's not for me thanks.

I don't mean to sound elitist. I have no objection to authors writing being dominated by comercial concerns. Just don't expect me to be queuing up with my cheque book to help fund their comfy retirement.

[Montero]

Following what Fried Egg said, just a comment summarising series. To me there seem to be three sorts

1 Series of complete stories each of which is pretty much stand-alone
2 Overlying story arc but each individual book is a complete story
3 Series where the story is multi-stranded and the further along it is, the slower it moves (Martin, Jordan)
and related is
4 Stand-alone stories set in the same universe - e.g Bujold's recent fantasy - The Hallowed Hunt is a standalone

So, I like good examples of everything except 3. I read Martin's Hedge Knight which I thought was excellent, tried the Fire and Ice and gave up some time ago - end of either second or third book. Never started Jordan as heard how slowly it was moving forwards.

At base I'm for anything that I enjoy - which isn't really helpful here. For example Barbara Hambly returned to her Darwath world after the trilogy ended and added several excellent stories. Was less convinced by her return to Dragonsbane because of the way she seriously beat up the characters

Jumping outside Fantasy I think Cornwell's Sharpe is a good example of a series working well. One or two of them I'm not so keen on, but it is interesting/impressive that where he has recently gone back and done infill stories they've been really readable. He has a nice firm series framework from the Napoleonic War.

By the way Fried Egg - not sure most writers enjoy a comfy retirement even when writing an established series, especially if only published in the UK. Not that I am saying you should give them your money - its up to them to entertain you, just don't overestimate what a writer gets.

A few top sellers like Pratchett will live very well, but from what I've seen on-line and talking to a few authors at cons, the writer tends to be the second income in the family!
Also the writer gets very little of the cover price - 6%, 8 % or 10% depending on status is what I've heard. The bookseller, depending on which one, takes up to 50% of the sale price. The rest is split between distributor, publisher, writer and agent.

One sort of spending I'd like to plug here is with an author you like, or with a new author you fancy trying, buy when it is published. If it sits on the shelf for months in a bookstore, then that store is less likely to re-order that book and that impacts sales, onto contract and hence variety available for the reader. Most writers start with a two book contract, if they don't sell that's it. I try and spread what spending I can do between further books from authors I know and like and trying a few new ones each year.

Also, most libraries will consider taking recommendations on authors. Don't always buy them, but I have successfully recommended books to libraries for purchase. Gets a new author out there being seen.

Here's to the wonderful world of books, long may it continue

[pyan]

Originally Posted by Montero

Bujold's recent fantasy - The Hallowed Hunt is a standalone

Um..are you sure, Montero?
I understood that it's the third Book of Chalion, after Paladin of Souls and The Curse of Chalion

Amazon.com: The Hallowed Hunt (Chalion, Book 3): Lois Mcmaster Bujold: Books

[Montero]

Totally different set of characters, same world. My other half just read and enjoyed it without reading the other two Chalion books.

[pyan]

Yes, sorry, on further investigation you're right.

Mind you, it's an interesting question...what constitutes a series if there are stories that share place but not character? If there is a story set 500 years in the future, or past for that matter, but on the same planet, can you say that's not part of the series?
Moreta, Dragonwoman of Pern by Anne McCaffrey comes to mind....

[Montero]

Mmm yes, gets called a series for want of a better word. I think I have seen "From the world of..." on the covers of books, but there is no neat one worder for it.


The first two Chalion books are chronological but not exactly a series. Curse of Chalion is focussed on the tutor to a girl, and is telling his story and the girl's (trying not to write a spoiler). Paladin of Souls follows up what happens to girl's mother and is I think several years later. Both excellent stories.

It would be interesting to see more done like this - so instead of slow moving mult-threader - the story is told one complete book/thread at a time. (Maybe not a complete thread when really intertwined, but something done more separated rather than all threads in one pot.) Writer would have to do one heck of a lot of advanced planning though to keep it all together

[Connavar]

In some genres like crime,sf i dont care how long a series are. Specially a book about a PI or a cop is mostly stand alone stories despite being series.


In fantasy i have a big trouble with all these epic fantasy 10+ books. They put me off. The famous fantasy series i have read feel like they are written like a soap. You see clearly they withhold parts of the stories so they can fill the series to 10+ books.

When i finished Tad William's War of the flowers i wondered why there werent many other complete stand alone fantasy books. I mean books that tell a complete fantasy story in one book, not spin off, humor books of famous series. Like you see Fiest and many others do.

Which is why i have tried to read many different subgenres of fantasy and older,different fantasy ala REH,Vance,Eddison to get away from all these huge epic series people recommend all the time...